A comprehensive plan for the future of the Broadway corridor in Vancouver has been approved, but its long-term direction is still uncertain and will only be decided by a future city council.
After three years of consultation and five weeks of debate, the council adopted Broadway’s plan by 7 to 4 votes on Wednesday night, almost 10 hours after the discussion began.
Councilors Melissa De Genova, Colleen Hardwick, Michael Weibe and Gene Swanson voted against.
Mayor Kennedy Stewart described the plan as “innovative”, as he announced his intention to vote in favor of the plan, saying it would create “what I think will be one of the most exciting neighborhoods in the country”.
The 30-year plan aims to set out strategies and guidelines for building much of the land north and south of where the Millennium Line extension is being built.
This will allow up to 50,000 more people to live in the corridor, from Clark to Arbutus Street and between 1st and 16th Avenues.
Near SkyTrain stations, mixed-use buildings of up to 40 floors can be allowed, while older rents, often small buildings of 10 units, can be replaced by residential complexes between 15 and 20 floors.
Some councilors who voted in favor of the plan described it as imperfect but necessary because of the new transit line.
“Not having a plan is not an option for us,” Count Said Pete Fry.
Opponents of the plan generally argue that it will create a corridor of towers that will displace current residents without making the city more accessible, while those who support say new housing is needed and new transit stations are the best place for a development center.
The Broadway plan will provide a general framework for what types of buildings are allowed in these areas, with towers between 20 and 40 storeys allowed in the light blue “centers”. (City of Vancouver)
As she prepared to vote against the plan, Hardwick denounced it as a “dream scenario” for land speculators and homeowners, whom she predicted would benefit greatly from rising property values.
Swanson predicts that working-class people working in the area will still be forced to travel from Surrey or Langley every day because they will not be able to afford a home close to work.
“The investor class will not build the housing we need for the working class,” she said.
Long list of changes added to the plan
While the council approved the plan, they also approved more than two dozen amendments, some requiring officials to consider additions or modifications that will be discussed by a new council after the October elections.
These include a bike lane down Broadway, freezing the development of side streets for five years, thinner buildings that allow side lawns and tree canopies like the West End, and controlling vacancies so that new tenants can cannot receive significant rents higher than the previous occupant.
Part of the opposition to Broadway’s plan focuses on fears that smaller, more affordable rental buildings on the streets north and south of Broadway will be built quickly and displace tenants. (Ben Nelms / CBC)
“It’s really much cheaper to control vacancies than to be homeless,” said Swanson, who proposed the amendment to get employees working with higher levels of management and developers to look at change.
“If Vancouver can be a leader in climate, it can also be a leader in protecting residents.
The amendment was narrowly passed, with some councilors arguing that it could lead to a small change, other than more regulation of jurisdiction controlled by the province through the Housing Rental Act.
“We have seen this again and again when we take over the work of the provincial government, which is funded to do this work,” said Coun. Rebecca Bly.
While the count. Christine Boyle supported the amendment to address control of vacancies, she acknowledged that the number of amendments and future votes for the council were “concerned”.
“This next election will be important not only for the actual implementation of Broadway’s plan, but also for all these important ideas,” she said.
“But the councilors who are making changes to solve problems throughout the city, stuck in changing this plan for a specific area, I don’t think that’s good governance.”
Add Comment